Headlines

Emily Smith

Let’s give chivalry another chance

Chivalrous behavior is benevolent because it flatters women and leads to their preferential treatment. But it is sexist because it relies on the “gendered premise” that women are weak and in need of protection while men are strong. “Benevolent sexism,” Kathleen Connelly and Martin Heesacker of the University of Florida write in the study, “is an ideology that perpetuates gender inequality.” They advocate interventions to reduce its prevalence, even though, they found, chivalry is associated with greater life satisfaction and the sense that the world is fair, well-ordered, and a good place.

Charles Murray, the libertarian social scientist at the American Enterprise Institute, summed up the study with tongue-in-cheek, writing “the bad news is that gentlemanly behavior makes people happy.” He goes on to ask, “When social scientists discover something that increases life satisfaction for both sexes, shouldn’t they at least consider the possibility that they have come across something that is positive? Healthy? Something that might even conceivably be grounded in the nature of Homo sapiens?” …

Chivalry is grounded in a fundamental reality that defines the relationship between the sexes, she explains. Given that most men are physically stronger than most women, men can overpower women at any time to get what they want. Gentlemen developed symbolic practices to communicate to women that they would not inflict harm upon them and would even protect them against harm. The tacit assumption that men would risk their lives to protect women only underscores how valued women are—how elevated their status is—under the system of chivalry.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Yes, women were valued.
They decided they wanted to roll in the gutter with the guys.
And be independent.
And were just as good as me, except paying for the date or killing that spider under the sink.
Can’t have both.
Be a lady or be one of the guys.
You want to be a lady I’ll treat you like one, want to compete with me; you chase that raccon out of your attic.

The ladies for whom I open doors or allow to have the right of way when crossing paths in the halls at work don’t ever seem to object. I would consider un-chivalrous behavior both rude and ungentlemanly.

Charles Murray, the libertarian social scientist at the American Enterprise Institute, summed up the study with tongue-in-cheek, writing “the bad news is that gentlemanly behavior makes people happy.” He goes on to ask, “When social scientists discover something that increases life satisfaction for both sexes, shouldn’t they at least consider the possibility that they have come across something that is positive? Healthy? Something that might even conceivably be grounded in the nature of Homo sapiens?”

Of course not! That would make sense! And if there’s one thing that academics and researchers must not do, it’s make sense!

Chivalry was a code that encapsulated so much of basic virtue and signaled a commitment to natural law. Among its virtues were good manners, self-sacrifice, consideration of others, heroism, etceteras.

It’s amusing that some social scientists find it galling that people think goodness is good. Imagine that.

Each of Nadia Cho’s five concurrent casual sex partners should frequently buy her flowers and remind her how beautiful and courageous she is for possessing the wisdom and bravery necessary to have radical, “positive” sex in a public library.

Can’t imagine why any of those upstanding gentlemen would be without chivalrous values.

Force something on someone who doesn’t want it? Way to sum up exactly why “chivalry” is problematic. The point is you should just be polite to everyone. I hold doors for men and women. I’ll help a guy or a girl with their chair. Its just called manners and has nothing to do with “chivalry.”

According to a 2010 Harris poll, 80 percent of Americans say that women are treated with less chivalry today than in the past. This is a problem that all women—especially feminists—should push back against.

You can’t have it both ways.

WisCon on December 11, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Exactly. Feminists want to be as strong or stronger than men in every area of life, but yet also want to be given extra perks for being weaker. Well, which is it, then? Do they need child support payments, or do they need affirmative action/special scholarships? And if women need both, doesn’t that undercut the ‘women are the same as men in every way’ argument?

If you want chivalry then you need a lot of the stuff that goes with it:

- chastity

- chasteness

- modesty

Most of the ‘opening the door for women’ stuff is Victorian era, if you want the real part of chivalry, then you must get the society that supports it and must support it yourself. You want the nice stuff that goes with chivalry? Then you had better be ready for the inequality of expectations that comes with it: men aren’t the only ones in that code of chivalry, and if you want the code, you had better be damn ready to act by it and adhere to it.

As for me I like women who realize that modesty means that hot brass falls off their clothing. More than willing to open doors for a woman with a bright smile, a good aim and who doesn’t think that they don’t have to fend for themselves because men will do it for them. You can keep that Princess-swooning stuff and learn to open doors for your elders on your own out of respect for them. For everyone else: respect is earned, not granted. Women said they don’t want the grant, so that must mean they are willing to earn the respect… fine with me.

You want chivalry?

Then be willing to pay up front with the simple stuff, don’t go hopping from bed to bed, don’t string men along, be chaste and modest, and if you lead a scandalous life, then be prepared to be called scandalous. And that still means you have to have a good aim, lady. If I take a bullet for someone I love, I damn well expect that person to use the few seconds I’ve gained them to survive… and if you can’t run, then the old ‘honor guard to hell’ deal is in play. Yeah, that is part of chivalry, too. Sucks, huh? Every woman was supposed to know what a dagger was, what a sword was and be prepared to defend herself, too. It was about civilizing warfare… the rest of it came with the deal. If you wanted men to act in a more civilized manner, you had to do so yourself. It wasn’t all about Princesses, princess.

I held a door for an older women walking into a store. She stared me dead in the face and asked: “What, you don’t think I can open my own fu***ng door?”

Fine.

And women wonder why men don’t treat them like ladies anymore. ‘Where are all the good men?’ they wonder. Generally speaking, they don’t WANT good men. Being kind, polite, intelligent and having a stable job used to be a pretty good leg up. Now those things are punch lines. You need a nice car, a large bank account and need to treat women with a mild disdain.

You want to be treated like a lady? ACT like a lady. My better half certainly does.